It’s unfortunate that Paul’s anti-war position causes succh a visceral reaction among many conservatives taht they oppose him as well when he advocates true conservative positions, such as the proper size and scope of government, the role of the government, the relationship between citizen and state, the proper level and method of taxation, the need for a monetary authority, and the desirability of a commodity-backed currency.
In 1996, mainstream GOP candidates for the Presidency advocated going back on the gold standard, and eliminating the Departments of Education, Transportation, HUD, and HHS. Now someone who takes such positions is apparently a candidate for institutionalization.
Sic transit ...
Washington avoided and wanted Americans to avoid political parties. He knew what gangs they can become. Gangs become defined not by ideals, but by simple dint of membership determined by the outward gang signs displayed — the colors one must wear, the hand signals, etc. The GOP is somewhat more sophisticated a party in its gang nature — the voting pattern in the House and Senate I think show that. Dems vote in lockstep. Republicans are more free in step.
But still, the GOP and also the talkers, and the blogs and the forums, we have gangs, or at least a strong gang-like aspect. We demand a unswerving loyalty on some issues. Sometimes those issues are truly key issue, bot mostly they are not, they are instead gang banners flown!